Re: B.10 Empty elements?
> | B.10 What form should EMPTY elements take, if there are EMPTY elements
> | in XML: <e>, <e/, or <e></e> (where '/' is assumed the NET string)
> | (7.3, 11.2.3)?
> Since this question remains open, as far as I can tell, let me just
> log another favorable response to the <e/> idea, which I think was
> originally advanced by James Clark. It looks and feels more natural
> than <e/ by having the universal tag-ender >, while also containing
> the / which suggests end-ness to us all; it doesn't make the user feel
> irritated the way <long-tag-name></long-tag-name> is going to do; and
> by differentiating the EMPTY elements even without a DTD it tidily
> resolves the problem of knowing what's going to have an end-tag and
> what ain't.
> John Lavagnino
Of the solutions proposed, this one seems the tidiest.
It's disadvantage is it confuses the SGMLer and the HTMLer
but it is minor confusion. <e></e> confuses them a bit
let. <e> confuses the parser and slows down the system.
Is that about it?